Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-violent abortion protests


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Anti-abortion movements as a sensible ATD. Owen&times; &#9742;  17:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Non-violent abortion protests

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Seems to be a WP:POVFORK of anti-abortion movements/United States anti-abortion movement, which covers these topics. Not to say there's no such thing as "non-violent abortion protests" but that it's not an independent topic. For better or worse, there's a lot of media coverage of anti-abortion violence, but the same coverage doesn't exist that treats non-violent protests as a distinct subject that passes WP:GNG (and at minimum WP:NOPAGE would apply). &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 14:44, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Medicine. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk \\ 14:44, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Anti-abortion movements. This title could be read to imply that most protests against abortion are violent, with the non-violent ones being rarer. That appears to be a WP:NPOV and WP:V violation. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:55, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete the vast majority of anti-abortion protests are already non-violent in nature. The anti-abortion movements page is therefore mostly covering the topic of non-violent abortion protests already. A page for 'anti-abortion terrorism', by contrast, would be justified for creation if it doesn't exist already, as it is markedly different from most anti-abortion movements and it has a fair amount of media attention. Reesorville (talk) 16:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Redirect to anti-abortion movements. Article is already covered, and the POV in this article is slanted throughout with no justification of using a separate article.Thanks, Neuropol  Talk  13:16, 13 June 2024 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.